Let me go a step further. What I think is really significant on that, when I think of my children in the same spot that we were a few years back where our kids are growing up and have a family, are married, have got 3 kids in their household, just think what it would mean if we could leave $580 a month in that household, instead of Washington confiscating that money out of their paychecks, bringing it out here to Washington, and dispensing it to whoever gets the interest on all of these notes. Make sure we understand, there are people getting the interest back on these notes. Would it not be great if a generation from now a family of 5 was not required to pay that $580 a month out here to Washington. What a great gift we would be giving to the next generation of Americans.
Mark Neumann: “Let me go a step further. What I think is really significant on that, when I think of my children in the same spot that…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the financial burden on families and the impact of government taxation.
Share
More from Mark Neumann
I hear this cry from my Republican colleagues and some from the other side as well that we should somehow take the Social Security surplus and use it to cut taxes. Why can we not do it the same way we did last year? We started talking…
the laws changed in 1983. In 1983 they increased the amount of money that was withheld from workers' paychecks because they knew the baby-boom generation was going to get to retirement. And the idea was, by increasing the amount withheld…
help me understand why it is that, as a taxpayer sends their money to Washington, and Washington decides how to best provide education for those kids back home, what exactly is it in the water out here or what is out here that makes us…
I get excited when we get to this point, because all of a sudden we begin to understand that we are no longer in 1993, whining and crying that we cannot do anything other than raise taxes on the American people to solve government…





